LOS ANGELES — The Los Angeles City Council voted today to amend Ordinance No. 181989 to adopt Los Angeles County’s porn-condom regulations imposed by Measure B and authorize the county to enforce them within city limits.
Measure B mandates barrier protection for performers during the production of adult films. Ordinance No. 181989 was passed by the City Council in January 2012, just prior to the AIDS Health Foundation’s big push for Measure B.
The only person to publicly speak out against the amendment was Arnold Sachs, a habitual City Council gadfly.
Sachs cited an editorial from the Daily Breeze, which mentioned the current migration of porn shoots to Ventura County to avoid Measure B regulations and the resulting loss of revenue for Los Angeles County. He also noted that porn performers are subcontractors “not employed by the companies that make porn movies” and have the opportunity to reject movies they do not want to participate in.
“This nanny state that you’ve become is over the top,” Sachs concluded. “I liked it better when you were [discussing] meatless Mondays,” which the council has dicussed as a proclamation in recent months.
The council voted unanimously in favor of the amendment.
Neither the city administrative officer nor the chief legislative analyst has completed a financial analysis of implementing the regulation and the city attorney has not yet submitted a fiscal impact statement to the mayor.
“This is just a formal adoption of their intentions all along,” said Diane Duke, leader of the Free Speech Coalition. “Adopting the county regulations allows the city to pass along the expense of mandatory barrier protection regulations to the county.”
The AHF sponsored the city and county laws, as well as Assembly Bill 332, which has stalled but is still alive at the state Legislature.
Miguel Santana, the Los Angeles’ city administrative officer, gave the city three options in January over the ordinance: Repeal city Ordinance No. 181989 and replace it with the county ordinance, requiring a ballot measure and voter approval; adopt both the city and county ordinances and resolve conflicts in enforcement as they arise; or amend City Ordinance No. 181989 to include the language and intent of county measure.
